This video covers the rumored plot, as revealed by a postproduction worker on Reddit. Also, how Sony coerced the original cast to cameo, how heads have already rolled over the trailer reception, twitter meltdowns, and how Sony wants your sexism for damage limitation.

yep. all the sexist bloggers and film sites and reviewers across the country gathered in some super-secret meeting and all decided to go dislike your youtube trailer in order to beat down women. yep, that's exactly what happened.

or, maybe, the film just looks like crap.

you know, if you want to "define the experience" so all those sexist bloggers can't do it for you, here's a couple tips:1) make better trailers;2) make a better movie.

good idea, though, releasing that 2nd trailer on facebook instead. everyone knows facebook is such a paragon of enlightened, rational, non-sexist conversation.

the most anti-feminist thing about this is the way the studio is pre-emptively blaming sexism for what they are increasingly realizing is going to be a box office flop. it's a self-fulfilling prophecy for them. they've been criticized over and over for not producing strong female roles, not entrusting tentpole blockbuster properties to female casts and female directors, which they blame on audiences not being willing to accept female casts in these kinds of movies. so when they finally make one, and it bombs for completely unrelated reasons, they have a built-in defense for why it flopped. and now, once they realize how it's most likely going to bomb and lose them a bunch of money, they're covering their asses and looking for someone to blame because they're afraid of losing their jobs over the stupid decision to make this movie in the first place. instead of admitting that this project was a bad idea from the beginning (and by beginning, i mean BEFORE they even came up with the idea of using a female cast), they'll just use sexism as a convenient scapegoat.

so let's conveniently shift the blame over to some sexist youtube commenters and film bloggers, instead of accepting the real reasons the movie will fail: 1) the general antipathy towards remaking/rebooting this movie in the first place; the only people who wanted to see another GB film were people who wanted to see the original cast; the idea of rebooting this franchise with a brand new, younger cast was always getting ripped to shreds by internet fanboys, even long before the idea of an all-female cast was a glint in some producer's eye and everyone assumed it would star seth rogen or james franco or channing tatum; 2) the horrible trailers, that first trailer was like cinematic afterbirth, the second trailer was better, but only in the way that vomit is better than diarrhea; and 3) the actual suckiness of the film itself, which is speculative at the moment, but is the only reasonable conclusion to be reached based on the actual footage taken from the trailers themselves. it's possible the film could be ok, and they just happened to pick the crappiest bits out to put in their trailers, but when a comedy film goes two trailers and still can't even find a single funny line or scene to put in there, it doesn't look promising.

the problem is, now the studios have the perfect excuse to never make another film like this again. i'd love to see a big-budget tentpole blockbuster franchise film with a predominantly female cast get made and have box office success. but it has to actually be a good film first and foremost. audiences couldn't give a shit if the cast is male or female, as long as the film is entertaining and funny enough to hold their interest for a couple hours while they shove $20 buckets of popcorn and coke IV's into their gullets. sure there's a small number of people out there sexist enough to refuse to see a film where women are the protagonists, but not enough to hurt the films BO. but instead of looking at all the REAL reasons the movie will fail, they'll home in on that one single solitary fact that it had an all-female cast and just conclude "welp, the american movie-going public is just too sexist to accept an all-female cast in one of these big-budget FX based films, guess we might as well go back to the usual sausage-fests those teenage boys eat up." and in the meantime, anyone who shows any negativity or disinterest in this film now gets to be labeled sexist, nevermind that there are plenty of successful blockbuster franchises, from twilight to the hunger games to divergent to even star wars now, that feature a female in the lead, and nevermind that most of the same people who loathe this remake, were excited about seeing a female in the lead in the new star wars film, or were pushing to have gillian anderson play the next james bond, or whatever. we've got one film with a female cast that bombed, so SEXISM! and everyone who gets manipulated into buying the studio's self-serving, ass-covering BS is just helping them to justify all the future female-centric tentpole films that they'll use this film as an excuse to not get made.

TheButcher wrote:THRDan Aykroyd Says 'Ghostbusters' Reboot Has "More Laughs and More Scares" Than the Original

please stop. you're embarrassing yourself.

ETA: actually, on 2nd reading, he may be right... he says it has more laughs and scares than the original TWO movies... and since the 2nd GB film was so unfunny, it actually entered negative-funny territory, it brings down the combined funniness of both films to a level that this film could actually surpass.

Gregg Kilday wrote:" Although he says he hasn't seen the new Ghostbusters (July 15), Panitch, who has two teenagers with his wife, interior designer Kristen Panitch, predicts big things: "It isn't a sequel, it's a reboot, so you have to look at it through a different filter, as something new. My kids have never seen the original Ghostbusters. They like [this cast], and they are really excited to see the movie."

"As originator of the original: Saw test screening of new movie. Apart from brilliant, genuine performances from the cast both female and male, it has more laughs and more scares than the first 2 films plus Bill Murray is in it! As one of millions of man-fans and Ray Stantz, I'm paying to see that and bringing all my friends!"

Don't forget to share this post on your Facebook wall and with your Twitter followers!

Hey folks, Harry here... Love hearing Dan Akyroyd loves the new GHOSTBUSTERS, Dan once recommended this Crystal Skull Vodka, that was smooth and got me wasted nicely, hoping this film is at least half that good, but so far, Dan's doing good in the recommendation area. This is the second INTERNATIONAL TRAILER that I've seen for the new Paul Feig directed GHOSTBUSTERS. At this point I just need to see the movie and hopefully have people judging the film on what it actually is as opposed to some abstract childhood threat. I don't know about you, but my Ghostbusters childhood memories are quite secure. I had the GHOSTBUSTERS sticker in my Sony Cassette Walkman as I pounded the GHOSTBUSTER Soundtrack as I rode around the ranch via both Moped and Horseback... poor horse (beat ya to it). Besides, I can't wait to see how the original cast are used... they've yet to appear in anything we've seen yet.

caruso_stalker217 wrote:It looks like their Ghostbusters HQ located in a Chinese restaurant. Is this how they're appealing to the Chinese market?

doubling down on making sequels of a reboot of a franchise that originally already had two sequels.....yeah, they are really showing artistic integrity nice to know that women actors are just as fake and money grubbing as the men when it comes to these things

Peven wrote:doubling down on making sequels of a reboot of a franchise that originally already had two sequels.....yeah, they are really showing artistic integrity nice to know that women actors are just as fake and money grubbing as the men when it comes to these things

I apparently missed the second sequel. What is fake about actors possibly enjoying their experience enough to want to work with everyone again? That is their chosen career. If they're able to actually have fun while working, kudos to them. Nothing wrong with that. Kind of hard to cry about artistic integrity when you're talking about a project called "Ghostbusters," but you done gone and done it.

Achievement Unlocked: TOTAL DOMINATION (Win a Werewolf Game without losing a single player on your team)

We are heartbroken at the recent passing of Filmmaker Harold Ramis who made us laugh for more than a generation. His iconic films are an enormous part of the American comic vocabulary- from Animal House to Ghostbusters and Vacation to Groundhog Day. Today’s podcast was recorded in 2005 at the 12th Austin Film Festival.

Brian Cronin wrote:Aykroyd’s originally saw Ghost Smashers as a vehicle for himself and his friend John Belushi, who would play Peter Venkman. Aykroyd worked on the script on and off throughout the early 1980s when he wasn’t busy with other projects. He was actually working on a line of dialogue for Belushi’s character in March 1982 when he learned his friend had passed away. A few months after Belushi’s passing, Aykroyd showed the script to Murray, a fellow Saturday Night Live veteran. Murray liked the idea and eventually led to the film getting made. The major hurdle, though, was Aykroyd’s rather epic vision.

In the script, the Ghost Smashers work for an interdimensional being known as Shandor. The basic driving force of the plot is that a being known as Zuul is accidentally trapped in this time and dimension by Shandor. Zuul’s owner, Gozer, wants his pet back, so he travels to our dimension to retrieve him and lay waste to those who would try to stop him. To get a sense of the scope of the original film, the famous Stay Puft Marshmallow Man scene was in Aykroyd’s original script, but it took place at the midpoint, and it was just one of a variety of manifestations of Gozer and not, like the final film, the ONLY manifestation.

The big ending was that Gozer would send the Ghost Smashers through different times and dimensions, and they would then work their way back to ours to stop Gozer.

Sean Hutchinson wrote:2. GHOSTBUSTERS COULD HAVE BEEN MUCH DIFFERENT—AND MUCH BIGGER.

Aykroyd found comedic inspiration in films like Bob Hope's The Ghost Breakers, the horror-comedies of Abbott and Costello, and Bowery Boys fare like Spook Busters and Ghost Chasers. He went wild writing his original script, which took place in the future and had a much darker tone. The actors he had in mind for the three main protagonists were himself, John Belushi, and Eddie Murphy. His concept involved dozens of Ghostbuster groups fighting specters across time and different dimensions. The now-iconic Stay Puft Marshmallow Man—which is in the climax of the finished film—appeared much earlier (on page 20) and was one of 50 large-scale monsters that the Ghostbusters would do battle with. Eventual director Ivan Reitman estimated that the first script would have cost up to $300 million to produce—and that was in 1984.

LESLEY M. M. BLUME wrote:By early August, a third and close-to-final draft of the script had been completed, and the team raced to begin three-dimensional casting as well. The character Dana Barrett—the sternly foxy love interest for Bill Murray’s character Dr. Venkman—caught the attention of Sigourney Weaver, who was ready to cut her teeth in comedy after her dramatic roles in Alien (1979) and The Year of Living Dangerously (1982).

Originally written up as a model in the script, Dana became a musician at Weaver’s suggestion. “She could be kind of uptight and a bit strict, but you know she has a soul because she plays the cello,” says Weaver. “We always thought of Sigourney as the Margaret Dumont of this movie,” says Reitman, referring to the redoubtable actress who served a foil to Groucho Marx in seven Marx Brothers films.

Germain Lussier wrote:This is where Ghostbusters 3 becomes the new Ghostbusters, which in recent weeks has been officially (but quietly) retitled by Sony as Ghostbusters: Answer the Call, to differentiate it from the original film.

“When Ivan first contacted me there had been two scripts written, one by friends of mine, Lee and Gene, and then Etan Cohen had done one and they were really good scripts,” Feig told us. “The problem for me creatively was I didn’t like the idea that the Ghostbusters had been forgotten. I love Ghostbusters 2 but I always bumped on that at the beginning. They’re disgraced? After saving New York? It felt like you have to crawl out of the morass to do that in a way. I didn’t respond to [it]. And also I didn’t want [the new characters] to be handed the keys to the kingdom in a kingdom that had already seen these ghost attacks.”

Pascal spent $93,000 on a trip to Toronto to talk GB3 with Ivan. Then the Feig transition happened and this changed from a Ghostbusters 3 story to a Ghostbusters reboot story. The first leak about Feig's involvement "opened the well" for Dan Aykroyd and put him on what was described internally as a "warpath." Word leaked to the press that Kate Dippold was co-writing before Ivan knew and Ivan wrote in that he was "incredibly pissed." Bad vibes were eventually calmed and the project was brought to the state it is in today.

Cpt Kirks 2pay wrote:

TheButcher wrote:Anyway, early buzz suggests that Ghostbusters is a good movie

Yeah, early buzz being a couple of Twitter tweets that aren't saying anything THAT glowingly enthusiastic anyway. C'mon.

3rd act gets really horribly dumb. Racist stereotype character is as advertised. Very funny parts. 5/10 The only really horribly cringey stuff in Ghostbusters has to do with there being like zero internal consistency with how the ghosts works. That and the stereotype of a “BIG SASSY YELLING BLACK WOMAN” which is like…Literally as advertised, the whole character. Really weird.They say they have to catch the ghosts. Then they kill the ghosts with energy bullets and by stabbing them with knives. Not kidding.

3rd act gets really horribly dumb. Racist stereotype character is as advertised. Very funny parts. 5/10 The only really horribly cringey stuff in Ghostbusters has to do with there being like zero internal consistency with how the ghosts works. That and the stereotype of a “BIG SASSY YELLING BLACK WOMAN” which is like…Literally as advertised, the whole character. Really weird.They say they have to catch the ghosts. Then they kill the ghosts with energy bullets and by stabbing them with knives. Not kidding.

3rd act gets really horribly dumb. Racist stereotype character is as advertised. Very funny parts. 5/10 The only really horribly cringey stuff in Ghostbusters has to do with there being like zero internal consistency with how the ghosts works. That and the stereotype of a “BIG SASSY YELLING BLACK WOMAN” which is like…Literally as advertised, the whole character. Really weird.They say they have to catch the ghosts. Then they kill the ghosts with energy bullets and by stabbing them with knives. Not kidding.

Did I write this?

the review, or the film?

Yes.

"Alright Shaggy - you and Scooby head over that way. The girls and I will go this way."

3rd act gets really horribly dumb. Racist stereotype character is as advertised. Very funny parts. 5/10 The only really horribly cringey stuff in Ghostbusters has to do with there being like zero internal consistency with how the ghosts works. That and the stereotype of a “BIG SASSY YELLING BLACK WOMAN” which is like…Literally as advertised, the whole character. Really weird.They say they have to catch the ghosts. Then they kill the ghosts with energy bullets and by stabbing them with knives. Not kidding.

3rd act gets really horribly dumb. Racist stereotype character is as advertised. Very funny parts. 5/10 The only really horribly cringey stuff in Ghostbusters has to do with there being like zero internal consistency with how the ghosts works. That and the stereotype of a “BIG SASSY YELLING BLACK WOMAN” which is like…Literally as advertised, the whole character. Really weird.They say they have to catch the ghosts. Then they kill the ghosts with energy bullets and by stabbing them with knives. Not kidding.

Did I write this?

the review, or the film?

Yes.

that's a conflict of interest

No it's not. Now the Battle of Gettysburg, there's an interesting conflict.

"Alright Shaggy - you and Scooby head over that way. The girls and I will go this way."

I've seen it and it's...a perfectly fine film. It's not great, it's not bad. I agree with Max Landis' statements, but I seemed to enjoy it more than him. Go for Kate McKinnion, who is the only character that is an actual character. Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy are doing the same schtick they've been doing, Leslie Jones is a strong black woman who don't need no man. Andy Garcia and Ed Beagly Jr were both a nice surprise.

It feels to me like it's Ghostbuster (84) mashed up with Ghostbusters 2, in that a team of scientists form a "business" after losing their academic careers, and end up stopping a weird loser with world domination plans and ghosts. It features scenes in sewers and ghosts of NYC's past haunting the city.

My biggest take-away is that these new Ghostbusters seem much more interested in the science of ghosts (even if there really is no internal logic and the gadgets seem designed to sell toys) and being friends-these aren't bad things for girls to see btw-then the OG team, which I heard recently was about a group of men starting a business. Money was always a concern, with mortgages being taken out and talk of sending bills, payment, etc. Outside of not being able to afford the Firehouse, these ghostbusters don't worry about that. They hire Chris Hemsworth, eat Chinese food or Papa Johns on the regular, Kristen Wiig lives in a nice apartment, with no mention of how they are affording these nor are they doing much busting. I think the movie suffers from a lack of a "Dana" character, who draw the Ghostbusters into their conflict with the antagonist.

The cameos were nice, but there was no reason, except Sony wanting this to be a reboot, why the cameos COULDN'T have been the members of the original team.

It also didn't have quite the same raunch that the original ghostbusters had. No weird sexual harrasement, no ghost blow jobs, nothing other than Kristin Wiig getting googly eyed around Chris Hemsworth, which no one also acknowledges how hot he is. It's all very shrugged off. It's CHRIS HEMSWORTH! I'm straight and I find him attractive. I expected a level of rauchiness coming from Paul Feig that just wasn't there.

I think it was HitFlix or io9, but a review I read suggested that maybe the studio had fucked around with the third act, and if that comes out than I can believe it, because that's what it feels like.

Thank you for the review. It was appreciated and enjoyable to read. Makes a change for a thread about a movie to actually have some writing on what someone thought about it rather than just silly remarks.